LETTER TO THE EDITOR

 

Dear Editor, Concerning the reply of Prof. Femiano, I cannot refrain from pointing out the following:

1. On the strength of my long experience as pathologist, I keep on believing that 4 mm precancerous lesion specimen may be inadequate to allow an accurate histological examination. The Author’s reply appears devoid of any scientific evidence-based foundation, and bases itself on Author’s own belief. Moreover, I consulted the Ethical Committee of the II University of Medicine and Surgery of Naples, and no approval had been required. Therefore, the Ethical Committee never approved the study.

2. The Author agrees that the instruments used for DNA cytometry are obsolete, but used them to achieve uniform data with a previous paper (of twelve years ago!). Apart the lack of any scientific logic in this answer, I consulted the laboratory reported in the above paper ("Istituto di Anatomia Patologica del 2° Policlinico di Napoli - Servizio di Citopatologia - Direttore: Prof. L. Palombini"), and it emerged that they never cooperated with the Author and were unaware of who provided the published data.

3. It appears ridiculous denying what has been asserted in a paper devised, written and many times corrected. In fact, in the paper the Author asserted that patients with erosive lichen planus have been treated with local radiotherapy, while in the reply he confirms that radiotherapy has not been used, but laser has been used.

In conclusion, the paper in question seems to be, if not completely invented, at least virtual and theoretically executed, without the use of the laboratory. I am disconcerted when consider that young and unpractised physicians, which entrust their vocational training to the international scientific literature, could be led to make mistakes that could cost patients’ life.

I am delighted at the scientific earnestness of your journal that allows these comments.

With kind regards
Philippe Martin
63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
Email: pmartin@lexpress.net

 

Answer to the second letter

Well, as I already affirmed in a precedent letter sent you and Oral Medicine Journal, please check the enclosure, my job for this manuscript was to put some data together trying to continue a line of research started in 1993 with a work published in Minerva Stomatologica in collaboration with Institute of Pathological Anatomy of Federico II in Naples . The new and subsequent data, as I affirmed in the preceding letter, came from different structures where still existed the obsolete electronic equipment like those used in 1993 for that work published in Minerva Stomatologica, this for trying to standardize the values.

I tried to do a clinical interpretation to these data.

I am a clinician. However I take the complete responsibility of this case.

I reported, in my previous letter to the journal, that such collaboration happened in 1993 with the Federico II University in Naples and not with II University in Naples, and this only in 1993 stopped. The data were gathered from more structures in different times and however not from Pathological Anatomy of Federico II in Naples.

Besides, in my manuscript, I declared Local Ethical Committee (and not Local Ethical Committee of II University in Naples in my work) omitting the local structure given that data came from other centres where existed local Ethical Committees. I want also to specify, that the patients with leucoplakia were submitted to excision surgery after incisional biopsy and after histological diagnosis; then when the dimensions of single lesion allowed it, excisional biopsy was performed during the diagnostic biopsy.

Dr. Felice Femiano
Professor of Oral Immunopathology
Stomatology Clinic.
II University of Medicine and Surgery
Naples
Italy
Email: femiano@libero.it